Garrett Wollman had written:
| In article ,
| Robert Hovland wrote:
|
| Does anyone know the latest info about what is going to happen to the FM
| band when the FCC forces all of the VHF television stations to give up
| their broadcast band
|
| The FCC is not so doing, thus the consequences of such an action are
| moot. (Just ask your friends at KOTA-DT channel 2.)

Evidently a few TVs are doing so already. KCSM San Mateo, CA (secondary PBS
for the San Francisco Bay Area) announced in its March program guide
that it will give up its analog allocation on channel 60 and will
broadcast exclusively as DT on channel 43, multicasting at least
two channels. The second channel will be a jazz channel
complementing KCSM-FM. The primary reason, though, seems to be
economic: "We made the decision that our resources needed to go
toward serving more students by creating a whole new telecourse
'stream', rather than paying what amounts to double rent and
electricity to continue our analog broadcast."

KCSM estimated that about 8% of its viewing audience will be
affected. Cable and satellite feeds are to continue.


--
"You're about to see a great sunset if you're in the right place."
-- KCBS morning traffic anchor, 6.58 am, February 9, 2004

"Mark Roberts" wrote in message
...

SNIP
The primary reason [for turning off over-the-air analog TV], though, seems
to be
economic: "We made the decision that our resources needed to go
toward serving more students by creating a whole new telecourse
'stream', rather than paying what amounts to double rent and
electricity to continue our analog broadcast."

KCSM estimated that about 8% of its viewing audience will be
affected. Cable and satellite feeds are to continue.

Amazing.

Is all that spectrum bandwidth occupied by over-the-air TV really serving
only a small percentage of the population? Rural areas surely must still
rely on over-the-air TV.


As an aside, in the news report that Cox Cable and ESPN had made peace it
was reported that Cox will pay ESPN $2.61 per month for each of their cable
subscribers!

[Moderator's Note: Yes, rural areas do, to a certain extent, rely on over-
the-air TV, but in many cases, people probably have DSS or cable, like my
parents who live 40 miles east of Cleveland in Geauga County, Ohio, and get
most of their programming from Dish Network.

Here in Apple Valley, CA, and throughout the (mostly rural) High Desert,
there are probably more people who have to rely on over-the-air signals, but
the Los Angeles stations, which are 90 miles southwest of here, all have
translators sitting on a tower down in Hesperia. The tower isn't well
maintained, though, and I don't know whether Victorville's lone local TV
station, KHIZ-TV 64, has its transmitter in that area or not... my wife says
they don't, actually, and that their transmitter is up in Victorville near
their studio.

But in Apple Valley/Victorville/Hesperia, unless you live outside city limits,
you can get cable from Charter, and up in Barstow, you can get cable from...
mmm... I think it's Time Warner. And in spite of the mountainous terrain,
most homes in this area are properly situated to use DSS also.

Interesting note: Until the recent mandates allowing DSS providers to
carry local stations, my parents had to use an antenna to get Cleveland's
TV stations. They're 40 miles from Cleveland, about the same distance from
Erie, PA, and maybe 50 from Youngstown, Ohio, and they could get stations
from all three cities, but the signals weren't very strong. In spite of the
fact that they could pay Dish $5 per month to get Cleveland local TV, I
believe they still use their antenna. I have no clue why. **SJS]

On 20 Feb 2004 19:01:43 GMT, "R J Carpenter"
wrote:


Amazing.

Is all that spectrum bandwidth occupied by over-the-air TV really serving
only a small percentage of the population? Rural areas surely must still
rely on over-the-air TV.


Some years ago, my employer's TV station (since sold) was hit by a
devastating arson fire that wiped out its transmitter. The station
was off the air for weeks, but kept feeding cable headends. Ratings
were unchanged. Hardly any viewers noticed the on-air signal was
gone.

I'm sure the cable penetration is even higher now, although it's been
several years since I checked.

Mark Howell

R J Carpenter had written:
|
| "Mark Roberts" wrote:
|
| KCSM estimated that about 8% of its viewing audience will be
| affected. Cable and satellite feeds are to continue.
|
| Amazing.
|
| Is all that spectrum bandwidth occupied by over-the-air TV really serving
| only a small percentage of the population?

In the San Francisco Bay Area, it is quite likely. Yet NBC did
suffer a hit when it got into a snit with KRON (from losing the
bidding to buy the station) and flipped the affiliation to KNTV in
San Jose. An estimated 25% of the geographic area lost NBC service
over-the-air, but KNTV quickly arranged with Comcast's predecessor
to ensure cable carriage on area systems. In any event, KNTV has filed
to move to Mt. San Bruno (the site that KCSM-TV is leaving). But the
hit in ratings may have come more from KNTV's image (or lack of image)
in the market and having to compete with the San Francisco incumbent
stations in news. KNTV doesn't seem to be really committing the
resources or the brains to do it consistently right. It's passable
but feels like about Kansas City in quality.

Anyhow, due to the terrain of the Bay Area, as well as its
geographic expanse, there is no site that will serve all
areas well. There will be significant dead spots no matter
where the transmitter is located -- obviously, that's true
for FM as well. The best combination for FM stations seems to be a
Sutro (SF) or Beacon site with on-channel repeaters in the I-680 corridor
in the East Bay. TVs haven't tried that combination, possibly due to
the relatively heavy reliance on cable. KDTV does have a translator
in Santa Rosa (far North Bay), and KRON did have one there until KQED-DT
came on and wiped out channel 30.


--
"You're about to see a great sunset if you're in the right place."
-- KCBS morning traffic anchor, 6.58 am, February 9, 2004

R J Carpenter wrote:

Is all that spectrum bandwidth occupied by over-the-air TV really serving
only a small percentage of the population?

This varies dramatically from market to market -- national "penetration"
numbers for cable and satellite are averages, with some areas much
lower, and others much higher. In the Dallas-Fort Worth area, off-air
viewing of the local stations is still common, since we have one of the
lowest cable penetration rates in the country, and not all satellite
subscribers opt to pay the satellite company to provide what they can
receive off-air for free.

TV stations. They're 40 miles from Cleveland, about the same distance from
Erie, PA, and maybe 50 from Youngstown, Ohio, and they could get stations
from all three cities, but the signals weren't very strong. In spite of the
fact that they could pay Dish $5 per month to get Cleveland local TV, I
believe they still use their antenna. I have no clue why. **SJS]

Why pay $5/month to get what they're currently getting for free? It
seems a very rational decision to me...especially since the antenna
apparently provides signals from mulitple markets, something that Dish
can't legally offer to them.

Tom Desmond wrote:

TV stations. They're 40 miles from Cleveland, about the same distance from
Erie, PA, and maybe 50 from Youngstown, Ohio, and they could get stations
from all three cities, but the signals weren't very strong. In spite of the
fact that they could pay Dish $5 per month to get Cleveland local TV, I
believe they still use their antenna. I have no clue why. **SJS]

Why pay $5/month to get what they're currently getting for free? It
seems a very rational decision to me...especially since the antenna
apparently provides signals from mulitple markets, something that Dish
can't legally offer to them.

Because none of the stations come in clear. I guess they don't mind having
snow on the TV as well as on the front lawn...

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) /
PGP: C57E 8B25 F994 D6D0 5F6B B961 EA08 9410 E3AE 35ED

Steven J Sobol wrote:
TV stations. They're 40 miles from Cleveland, about the same distance from
Erie, PA, and maybe 50 from Youngstown, Ohio, and they could get stations
from all three cities, but the signals weren't very strong. In spite of the
fact that they could pay Dish $5 per month to get Cleveland local TV, I
believe they still use their antenna. I have no clue why. **SJS]

Because none of the stations come in clear. I guess they don't mind having
snow on the TV as well as on the front lawn...

Cable isn't cheap - last I looked, the basic "lifeline" service (just
the local OTA stations and a couple of shopping channels) is $300/year
here. I know people who spend over $1,200/year for cable. Personally,
I'm willing to live with a fair amount of snow to save $300!

One year's "lifeline" cable charges here would buy a digital tuner. It
can be connected to their existing analog TV and antenna and will
deliver a fantastic picture & sound.
--
Doug Smith W9WI
Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66
http://www.w9wi.com

Doug Smith W9WI wrote:

Cable isn't cheap - last I looked, the basic "lifeline" service (just
the local OTA stations and a couple of shopping channels) is $300/year
here. I know people who spend over $1,200/year for cable. Personally,
I'm willing to live with a fair amount of snow to save $300!

Cable isn't cheap, but 1200/year is 100 per month. I don't pay that much
to Charter, and I not only have digital cable, I also have the $40/month
Internet service (it's the middle-of-the-line residential package, 768x128
Kbps, similar in bandwidth to many residential DSL packages).

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) /
PGP: C57E 8B25 F994 D6D0 5F6B B961 EA08 9410 E3AE 35ED

On 24 Feb 2004 03:32:02 GMT, Steven J Sobol ("Steven") writes:

Steven Doug Smith W9WI wrote:
Cable isn't cheap - last I looked, the basic "lifeline" service (just
the local OTA stations and a couple of shopping channels) is $300/year
here. I know people who spend over $1,200/year for cable. Personally,
I'm willing to live with a fair amount of snow to save $300!

Steven Cable isn't cheap, but 1200/year is 100 per month. I don't
Steven pay that much to Charter, and I not only have digital cable,
Steven I also have the $40/month Internet service (it's the
Steven middle-of-the-line residential package, 768x128 Kbps, similar
Steven in bandwidth to many residential DSL packages).

Here in the Boston area, the top tier package for Digital Cable
costs $94.20, HDTV is another $7.25, and if you want the Internet
that's another $42.95. Not counting the rental of the set-top box,
and all the taxes and extra fees.